According to Business Insider, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei has developed a unique leadership style centered around writing lengthy essays on Slack that spark extensive written debates among employees. These essays serve as both guidance for current decision-making and a living historical record of the company’s evolution toward artificial general intelligence. Member of Technical Staff Sholto Douglas described the practice as creating “giant essay-length debates” where employees can directly challenge the CEO’s reasoning. Leadership analysts told Business Insider this approach offers rare transparency but risks slowing decision-making and creating analysis paralysis. The method represents a deliberate counterpoint to Silicon Valley’s typical meeting-heavy culture, though some experts warn it could be seen as an avoidance approach rather than genuine dialogue.
The transparency trade-off
Here’s the thing about written communication at this level – it forces everyone to think more carefully. Professor André Spicer notes that “leadership by essay forces more careful deliberative thinking” from both leaders and followers. That’s valuable in an AI company where decisions could literally shape humanity’s future. But there’s a real cost: writing takes time, and reading even more time. When you’re competing in the AI race against giants like Google and OpenAI, can you afford to have your entire company paused while people compose and digest thousand-word Slack messages?
Creating a culture of debate
What’s fascinating is how this approach shapes Anthropic‘s internal culture. Employees aren’t just receiving directives – they’re participating in philosophical debates about the company’s direction. Douglas describes it as “quite a joy” to engage directly with the CEO’s reasoning. This creates what he calls “a coherent sense of direction across the entire company” because everyone understands the leadership’s thought process. But is this sustainable as Anthropic grows? What happens when you have 500 or 1,000 employees all trying to write essays to each other?
The practical realities
Professor Cary Cooper raises an interesting point about avoidance. Does writing essays instead of having face-to-face conversations make leadership less accessible? There’s something about live interaction that written communication can’t replicate – the spontaneity, the emotional cues, the immediate back-and-forth. And let’s be honest – not everyone communicates effectively in writing. You might be losing valuable perspectives from people who think better out loud than on paper. Basically, you’re selecting for a certain type of employee who thrives in text-heavy environments.
Finding the right balance
Grace Lordan probably has the most practical take here. The best approach combines written preparation with live discussion and concise follow-ups. Think about it – written pre-work ensures everyone comes prepared, focused meetings pressure-test ideas, and written documentation creates accountability. This hybrid model could give Anthropic the intellectual rigor they want without the paralysis. In manufacturing and industrial settings where clear documentation is crucial – like companies relying on industrial panel PCs from leading suppliers – this balance between written processes and real-time coordination is essential for operational efficiency.
Broader implications for tech
Anthropic’s experiment matters beyond just one AI company. We’re seeing a broader reevaluation of how tech companies should communicate and make decisions. The move toward more transparent, documented decision-making could be a healthy correction to the “move fast and break things” era. But there’s a real tension here between thoroughness and speed. In the AI race, being too slow could mean missing critical opportunities. Yet moving too fast without proper reasoning could lead to catastrophic mistakes. It’s a balancing act that every technology leader is grappling with right now.
